Matching Items (371)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

42864-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009
Description

Maricopa County and twenty four incorporated cities and towns, two tribes and one other governmental organization participated in a cooperative effort to update the Maricopa County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Hazard mitigation planning reduces the risk to people and property, and reduces the cost of recovering from a disaster. A

Maricopa County and twenty four incorporated cities and towns, two tribes and one other governmental organization participated in a cooperative effort to update the Maricopa County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Hazard mitigation planning reduces the risk to people and property, and reduces the cost of recovering from a disaster. A hazard mitigation plan can help communities become more sustainable and disaster-resistant by focusing efforts on the hazards, disaster-prone areas and identifying appropriate mitigation actions. Effective mitigation planning and efforts can break the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors officially adopted the Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan on April 14, 2010.

42865-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2010-04
Description

For a community to take full advantage of the opportunities provided in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, it must first prepare a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Maricopa County, partner agencies, and participating communities wish to adopt a Plan to better protect their communities from wildfire risk, to better

For a community to take full advantage of the opportunities provided in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, it must first prepare a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Maricopa County, partner agencies, and participating communities wish to adopt a Plan to better protect their communities from wildfire risk, to better prepare citizens, and to become eligible to apply for and receive federal and other grant monies to implement wildland fire mitigation and programs.

42868-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2013-10
Description

In fiscal year 2011, Paradise Valley Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer districts’ and it operated efficiently overall. The District’s per pupil administrative costs were lower than peer districts’, and its food service and transportation programs operated efficiently. The District’s plant operations cost per square foot was

In fiscal year 2011, Paradise Valley Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer districts’ and it operated efficiently overall. The District’s per pupil administrative costs were lower than peer districts’, and its food service and transportation programs operated efficiently. The District’s plant operations cost per square foot was lower than peer districts’. However, the District did not gain the full benefit of potential savings from this lower cost per square foot because it maintained a large amount of excess building space. The District should continue to review options to address its excess building capacity. Additionally, the District’s solar power system contracts are unlikely to meet expectations for cost savings, and although the District has taken action to recover estimated financial losses, it should continue to monitor its solar power production and electricity usage. The District also needs to strengthen controls over its computer systems.

42869-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2008
Description

This Protocol, initially developed in 1995, is offered to coordinate the involvement and interaction of each agency in Maricopa County involved with providing care, treatment, and assistance to all children, whether victims or witnesses, where criminal conduct is suspected. This Protocol serves to ensure each child is treated with dignity,

This Protocol, initially developed in 1995, is offered to coordinate the involvement and interaction of each agency in Maricopa County involved with providing care, treatment, and assistance to all children, whether victims or witnesses, where criminal conduct is suspected. This Protocol serves to ensure each child is treated with dignity, fairness, and respect and protected from harassment, intimidation, or abuse, and to minimize the secondary trauma that can accompany investigations of criminal conduct.

42886-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-12
Description

In 2006, the Bureau of Justice Statistics awarded a State Justice Statistics grant to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission’s Statistical Analysis Center to conduct research on homicide in Arizona. The Center, with assistance from local law enforcement officials, and researchers from the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona

In 2006, the Bureau of Justice Statistics awarded a State Justice Statistics grant to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission’s Statistical Analysis Center to conduct research on homicide in Arizona. The Center, with assistance from local law enforcement officials, and researchers from the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona State University, collected homicide data from the following sources: Supplemental Homicide Reports, law enforcement homicide case files, and autopsy reports. The purpose of this report is to provide a general description of the scope and nature of the homicide problem in Arizona. Specifically, this report examines the general characteristics of victims and offenders, the circumstances surrounding homicide incidents, temporal patterns when homicides occur, and the geographic characteristics where homicides took place.

43448-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-12-31
Description

Whether reintroduction and recovery should be allowed, and if so where and how, were hotly debated through the 1990s, when reintroduction was formally proposed. They still are. Regardless, the proposal process ended with a nonessential experimental population rule (hereafter Final Rule) approved on January 12, 1998. In keeping with the

Whether reintroduction and recovery should be allowed, and if so where and how, were hotly debated through the 1990s, when reintroduction was formally proposed. They still are. Regardless, the proposal process ended with a nonessential experimental population rule (hereafter Final Rule) approved on January 12, 1998. In keeping with the stated experimental nature of the reintroduction effort, and respectful of the doubts expressed by many, the Final Rule required full evaluations after 3 and 5 years to recommend continuation, modification, or termination of the Reintroduction Project. The 3-Year Review, conducted in 2001, concluded that reintroduction should continue, albeit with important modifications. However, as we discuss elsewhere in this report, for many reasons the 3-Year Review recommendations were not implemented, at least not to the extent that interested parties and stakeholders expected or desired. Regardless of cause, the apparent lack of closure was a significant agency and public concern when the time came for the next review.

By agreement among the primary cooperating agencies, responsibility for the Reintroduction Project’s 5-Year Review fell to the Mexican Wolf Blue Range Adaptive Management Oversight Committee (AMOC) that oversees the Project on behalf of six Lead Agencies and various formal and informal Cooperator agencies. AMOC and the Project's Interagency Field Team conducted the 5-Year Review to comply with the Final Rule, but above and beyond that the intent was to identify and implement improvements in the Project. The Review consists of several primary components: Administrative, Technical, Socioeconomic, and Recommendations. Each is detailed in this report. Review and adaptive management of the Reintroduction Project will not stop with this review. Project cooperators will continue to seek internal and public input regarding Mexican wolf reintroduction to help achieve recovery goals and objectives.

43459-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005
Description

The Arizona Game and Fish Department held four Wildlife Summits to obtain input from their stakeholders into the development of the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Stakeholder groups invited to participate in the Summits included Department constituency groups, special interests, local governments, Native American tribes, interagency cooperators, and the general public.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department held four Wildlife Summits to obtain input from their stakeholders into the development of the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Stakeholder groups invited to participate in the Summits included Department constituency groups, special interests, local governments, Native American tribes, interagency cooperators, and the general public. This report combines the votes from each of the four Summits into one database for analysis. The results for each individual Summit are attached as separate reports. Comparisons are made in this combined report to show differences between the results of individual Summits. The combined results have also been analyzed to determine if there were any significant differences in opinions of the various stakeholder groups. Demographic breakdowns of the individual Summit results are not included in the separate reports because they would not be statistically valid given the small number of participants at each Summit. Participant comments are included in the
individual Summit reports.

43461-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2004-08-25
Description

Identifying the primary managers of wildlife habitat can provide one useful type of information for development of Arizona’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. This can contribute to satisfying at least three of the required elements: #4 (conservation actions and priorities), #5 (monitoring plans), and #7 (coordination). This can be particularly useful

Identifying the primary managers of wildlife habitat can provide one useful type of information for development of Arizona’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. This can contribute to satisfying at least three of the required elements: #4 (conservation actions and priorities), #5 (monitoring plans), and #7 (coordination). This can be particularly useful in the prioritization of actions and resources.

Toward that end, The Nature Conservancy has compiled relevant information and conducted new analyses from our recent statewide efforts to map and analyze two natural communities, grasslands and forests, and a species group, native fish. The results are presented in three sections, with appendices describing data sources.

43519-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2007-04
Description

Regional economic theory states that a local economy is driven by economic activities that import money into the region (county or state in this report) through the sales of goods and services to customers who do not live in the region. Such export activities differ from population-driven activities, which sell

Regional economic theory states that a local economy is driven by economic activities that import money into the region (county or state in this report) through the sales of goods and services to customers who do not live in the region. Such export activities differ from population-driven activities, which sell to and support the local population. “Export” in this usage is not limited to goods and services sold to customers from other countries, but includes all sales made to customers outside the local region — at the state level, in other states, and at the county level, in other counties within the state. An export activity sometimes is referred to as a “basic” activity — the terms are synonymous.

43521-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2008-01
Description

Employment in high-technology activities decreased between 2001 and 2005 in Arizona. Coupled with significant employment growth in other sectors, the high-technology share of the Arizona economy dropped considerably. High-tech employment also fell nationally, but at a lesser rate than in Arizona. With national employment growth modest in other sectors, hightech’s

Employment in high-technology activities decreased between 2001 and 2005 in Arizona. Coupled with significant employment growth in other sectors, the high-technology share of the Arizona economy dropped considerably. High-tech employment also fell nationally, but at a lesser rate than in Arizona. With national employment growth modest in other sectors, hightech’s share of the national economy did not fall much. The decrease in high-technology employment in Arizona between 2001 and 2005 largely occurred in Maricopa County. However, a decline also occurred in Pima County.